The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict

Noting the inadequacies of existing IR theories to explain the security policies of states in the global south and the frequent intra-state conflicts there, this research demonstrates the analytical capacity of the insecurity dilemma as an alternative framework. The research develops the insecurity...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Topgyal, Tsering
Published: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London) 2011
Subjects:
951
Online Access:http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.548130
id ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-548130
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-5481302015-10-03T03:16:00ZThe insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflictTopgyal, Tsering2011Noting the inadequacies of existing IR theories to explain the security policies of states in the global south and the frequent intra-state conflicts there, this research demonstrates the analytical capacity of the insecurity dilemma as an alternative framework. The research develops the insecurity dilemma first and then applies it on the Chinese-Tibetan conflict. Over sixty years of violence and dialogue has brought the Chinese and the Tibetans no closer to a resolution of their conflict. The insecurity dilemma provides a nuanced understanding of the underlying reasons for this protracted conflict. This research argues that, conscious of its weakness as a state, which has implications for state, regime and ‘national’ security, China has pursued state-building through its policies on religion, language, education and economy in Tibet. Beijing has also denied the existence of a ‘Tibet Issue’ and rejected a number of Tibetan proposals for autonomy out of fears that they threaten their state-building project in Tibet. Conversely, Tibetan identity insecurity, generated by the Chinese policies, migration and cultural influences inside Tibet, explains both the Dalai Lama’s unpopular decision to give up his erstwhile aspiration for Tibetan independence as well as his steadfast demands for autonomy and unification of all Tibetans under one administration. Identity insecurity also drives the multi-faceted Tibetan resistance both inside Tibet and in the diaspora. Although the intentions of both Beijing and the Tibetans are to increase their respective securities identified above, the outcome is greater insecurity for both, plunging them into dilemmatic cycles of state-building and hardening of policies on the Chinese side and strengthening of identity and resistance on the Tibetan side. This study gives play to a multiplicity of actors, objectives and strategies on both sides and examines the feed-back effect that exists between the Sino-Tibetan conflict and the regional and global political strategic and ideological competitions.951DS Asia : JQ Political institutions AsiaLondon School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.548130http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/237/Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
collection NDLTD
sources NDLTD
topic 951
DS Asia : JQ Political institutions Asia
spellingShingle 951
DS Asia : JQ Political institutions Asia
Topgyal, Tsering
The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
description Noting the inadequacies of existing IR theories to explain the security policies of states in the global south and the frequent intra-state conflicts there, this research demonstrates the analytical capacity of the insecurity dilemma as an alternative framework. The research develops the insecurity dilemma first and then applies it on the Chinese-Tibetan conflict. Over sixty years of violence and dialogue has brought the Chinese and the Tibetans no closer to a resolution of their conflict. The insecurity dilemma provides a nuanced understanding of the underlying reasons for this protracted conflict. This research argues that, conscious of its weakness as a state, which has implications for state, regime and ‘national’ security, China has pursued state-building through its policies on religion, language, education and economy in Tibet. Beijing has also denied the existence of a ‘Tibet Issue’ and rejected a number of Tibetan proposals for autonomy out of fears that they threaten their state-building project in Tibet. Conversely, Tibetan identity insecurity, generated by the Chinese policies, migration and cultural influences inside Tibet, explains both the Dalai Lama’s unpopular decision to give up his erstwhile aspiration for Tibetan independence as well as his steadfast demands for autonomy and unification of all Tibetans under one administration. Identity insecurity also drives the multi-faceted Tibetan resistance both inside Tibet and in the diaspora. Although the intentions of both Beijing and the Tibetans are to increase their respective securities identified above, the outcome is greater insecurity for both, plunging them into dilemmatic cycles of state-building and hardening of policies on the Chinese side and strengthening of identity and resistance on the Tibetan side. This study gives play to a multiplicity of actors, objectives and strategies on both sides and examines the feed-back effect that exists between the Sino-Tibetan conflict and the regional and global political strategic and ideological competitions.
author Topgyal, Tsering
author_facet Topgyal, Tsering
author_sort Topgyal, Tsering
title The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
title_short The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
title_full The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
title_fullStr The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
title_full_unstemmed The insecurity dilemma and the Sino-Tibetan conflict
title_sort insecurity dilemma and the sino-tibetan conflict
publisher London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
publishDate 2011
url http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.548130
work_keys_str_mv AT topgyaltsering theinsecuritydilemmaandthesinotibetanconflict
AT topgyaltsering insecuritydilemmaandthesinotibetanconflict
_version_ 1716826142718033920